What is DezNat?
Some church members have started using the hashtag #DezNat on Twitter, Facebook, and other social media sites. People have noticed that #DezNat seems to rile up other members because of the opinions attached to it, and yet it is not really defined. There doesn’t appear to be any leaders behind it. No ideology or set of ideas. Members who post under #DezNat insist: “#DezNat is a community of brothers/sisters who love our Savior & strive to follow His light. Everyone is welcome, disrespect is NOT.” The only set of principles to be found by supporters are: A Call To Action – Rather than symbolize a set of beliefs, #DezNat appears to be all about action. It is encouragement to obey church doctrines and policies as directed by church priesthood leaders–all of them. A pretty simple idea. Yet some members worry about an ulterior motive: “Look up #DezNat and despair that in many conservative circles of the LDS Twitter-sphere, members are espousing alt-right beliefs and excusing it by calling it ‘loyalty to the brethren.’” Another said #DezNat is part of the “Ultra-conservative Mormon Twitter checklist,” along with calling “skeptics ‘apostates” and thinking “Church and leaders are infallible.” This appears to be a valid concern. Militant ideologists are known to swiftly infiltrate and subvert online campaigns and turn them into campaigns of racism and intolerance. The film The Wave illustrates how a slogan can unite people under forceful leadership and encourage fascistic behavior. If not ideologists, big thinktanks and corporations can subvert a grassroots cause and turn it political, as we saw with Occupy Wallstreet. Some I have interviewed worry this hashtag is just an ideological branch. Yet each attempt to attach conservative ideas or politics to #DezNat appears to be met with fierce resistance. Each attempt to define or direct is shouted down, and it remains leaderless. Certainly aware that a one word slogan for “Follow the Prophet” can easily be manipulated, especially when it is so spontaneous and leaderless. Supporters we spoke to insist that it is for people of all races, all sexes, all nationalities, and not to be metonymous with anything except the gospel. This kind of phenomenon is nothing new. Anne Ryan famously hypothesized the mass rejection of government-controlled economy with the phrase “Who is John Galt,” and there wasn’t really any ideology behind this slogan. It was simply a call for people to stop being industrious. But there was a lot of collective meaning behind this call, as each person who dropped out of society did so for similar reasons, as an act of resistance against an overbearing government. A particularly bizarre aspect about the internet is how short names or phrases can become attached to certain ideas and then spread like wildfire among like-minded groups of people, and so there are these calls to action being thrown about all over the place, often in the form of a hashtag. The reason few of these hashtags don’t last very long is because it is necessary for it to be leaderless and unideological, and it is so easy to be subverted. Free Speech – The hashtag means “follow the prophet,” but it also implies “it is okay to follow the prophet.” Supporters see this as hugely liberating for members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, as leaders of popular culture so loudly declare it is not okay to follow the prophet–and it’s not even okay to talk about it. It reminds me of how as a missionary I found it easier to preach the gospel to strangers if I had a nametag on my shirt pocket. Likewise, maybe a hashtag can be a symbol for people’s boldness in believing what they want to believe. This may be why some church members appear to give religious opinions that are politically incorrect using the hashtag. Of course, the danger here is for somebody to state an extreme opinion that is not in line with gospel teachings and for mainstream media to paint the entire hashtag as agreeing with it. The raging debate today is whether platforms should exist for people with “harmful” opinions. Also, apostates could infiltrate the hashtag and dilute it with apostate opinions to the point that the hashtag becomes useless. Why ‘Deseret Nation’ – In the mid-1900’s, Mormon settlers proposed statehood for a large area of North America which included present-day Utah and parts of surrounding states. In 1850, Congress recognized the territory of Utah encompassing just a portion of the proposed area and using the name “Utah.” At first, it seemed like the label DezNat inferred that they were nationalists for the state of Deseret. “Do they seek for the original proposal to be recognized by the United States government? But maybe it is more complicated than that. Maybe it is really about Deseret being a symbol for Mormon ambition that is still met with hostility and disrespected by those who control American culture. Deseret becomes metonymous for the Mormon proposal that wasn’t accepted by the United States, the compromise that we still find ourselves being forced to make, the regiments of U.S. soldiers that the President sent to the territory to repress the “Mormon rebellion,” the beliefs and culture that were erased, the hostility that drove pioneers to the region in the first place, the hope and industry that Mormon settlers used to build an oasis from the desert, and the death of Joseph Smith that persecutors thought would smash the church once and for all. It comes down to an entire separate culture that mainstream American culture seeks to wipe out. Deseret could be viewed like the great lost Byzantium Empire, or the great kingdom of Israel that Jeremiah and Ezekiel envisioned being restored in heavenly spender. Those we spoke to who post under #DezNat say if they are to be considered “nationalist,” it is only in support of the “kingdom of God,” which would make the whole thing simple millenialism. But then “Deseret” is added to the hashtag, and suddenly the millenial kingdom of God is something that is being built right now, they are preparing for, envisioning, and celebrating. Rather than mourning the fall of the prior kingdom like Jeremiah, are they encouraging a real future in accordance with Article of Faith #10? Protecting Our Identity From Media Appropriation – It is really a simple meme. When I was on my mission in Germany, I once walked into a bookstore to see how many books there was on the Church. I found a few, but they were all written by non-members in some university somewhere. This gave me a sense of frustration. How often do we get to define ourselves before the world? Search for “Book of Mormon” on the internet and you will find page after page about a Broadway musical created by non-members ridiculing the church. Few people read the actual book, even though we send tens of millions of people across the world to present it to people. We want so hard to define ourselves, and everyone else is trying so hard to define us instead, it seems. Does DezNat speak to this? Perhaps the most powerful thing of all about this hashtag is that if the mainstream media dismisses it as ideological or extremist, this will further prove the hashtag’s point–that the mainstream media unfairly defines the church. It will illustrate just how powerless an oppressive group of media corporations have made church members to define themselves. This also relates to President Russell M. Nelson’s recent declaration that the media should use the church’s real name instead of the nickname ‘Mormon’–a declaration which has gone pretty much unheeded by the media. Church leadership and church membership appear to be realizing that they are being appropriated, and they are fed up with it. The big message behind #DezNat, according to those we spoke to, is for the media to report news and not control or influence the church. An Answer To #Twitterstake – The dominant church meme on the internet has always been #Twitterstake, a rallying cry for church members to gather as an online community. I think the big difference is Twitterstake often seeks to integrate the church with dominant online culture while DezNat preserves fault lines. Lots of members go to the internet as an outlet for church beliefs or culture that they don’t feel entirely comfortable with, to talk it out with people who have the same concerns. So you get a lot of doubt, questioning, and popular American culture, which is inevitable for any minority group. It appears that DezNat goes the other direction and seeks acceptance that we are a peculiar people. Are Twitterstake and DezNat compatible? I think so. I don’t think they need to pull in opposite directions. The big danger with Twitterstake is that popular culture overrides and drives gospel foundations, and the big danger with DezNat is that subversive ideologies and leaders turn it into extremism. Together, perhaps they can balance each other out, like two poles on either sides of a rope. As a third-party observer, I hope this budding movement does not turn toward extremism or hatred. Hopefully, drawing the line the sand does not cause segregation or intolerance. Perhaps the church’s name policy has emboldened church members to establish our identity as followers of Christ, and to be given the right to establish their own religious identity.